Main menu

Post navigation

The following was recently written and circulated by John Barlow, Member of Parliment for Foothills in Alberta:

Good afternoon,

I want to bring to your attention substantial changes brought forward by the Liberal Government to the rules around which employers can qualify for funding through the Canada Summer Jobs program. These changes ostracize groups or individuals who disagree with the Liberal policy platform on abortion or LGBTQ2. Due to these changes, some applicants will no longer be eligible for funding and many students will not find work because of this discriminatory decision.

Under the new rules, organizations wishing to participate in the Canada Summer Jobs program will be required to attest they respect reproductive rights and gender identity and expression. As Canadians, I think we can all agree, protecting Human Rights is vitally important. However, while this declaration asserts reproductive and gender rights as a human right in Canada, it simultaneously abolishes the right to freedom of belief and opinion, which is guaranteed by Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The Liberals are basing funding decisions on whether or not you hold a certain belief, and whether or not that belief aligns with Justin Trudeau’s political policy opinion on abortion, gay marriage and transgendered rights.

This policy isn’t about supporting and promoting the activities or services an organization is engaged in within a community. This policy targets the personal beliefs of the individuals who run those organizations, and penalizes the organization and students as a whole for not aligning their beliefs with those of the Liberal Party.

Canadians are allowed to have different opinions from the governing party, that is what a true and free democratic country is founded upon. This new attestation in the Canada Summer Jobs program is the beginning of a slippery slope of prejudice and discrimination against Canadians for their religious beliefs.

I share the writing above not to support a political candidate or party but to draw attention to a policy which, if as described, will affect many of our churches across Western Canada. The moral considerations regarding discrimination has a couple different faces. Do we only want rulings that favour those who think like us? If a professing Christ follower understands the scripture as against discrimination of LGBTQ2 but reads it as standing against same sex marriage, is that person discriminating? Does the State have the right to command allowable religious beliefs? If diversity is essential for our culture today, does the more conservative end of the Church necessarily get the short end of the stick and marginalization? Polarization often brings an end to conversation.

Again if this is true and if maneuvers like this occur, what will it mean for the future of faith-based hospitals, summer camps, street missions, many food banks, or even general volunteerism?

I do not have immediate answers for every possible moral code violation and I admit political decisions can be difficult. I am for freedom of each one to practice their religion, but I am against hatred and unjust discrimination. My hope would be for more conversation before legislation. Let us pray for those in authority over us, for justice and for a proper approach to injustice on the many levels of our governmental rulings. If the eventual ruling is not quite as restricting as the MP implies, then I apologize now for the anxiety I may have fostered.

This text continues to return to me over and over: “I will know that you stand firm in the one Spirit, striving together as one for the faith of the gospelwithout being frightened in any way by those who oppose you. This is a sign to them that they will be destroyed, but that you will be saved—and that by God” (Philippians 1:27b-28).

In today’s world I find large sections of our Christian society running on fear. I hear it in reactions to proposed or existing legislation, in concern over financial security going forward, in the public exposure of aberrant theologies, in demonstrations at board meetings where faith and unity seem distant, in harsh broad sweeping tweets making mountains out of molehills, and regularly in sermons.

I find too often Christian leaders have used fear to motivate and get people onto the same page with them. In truth this strategy can work, but it has a short-term return.

Absolutely preach the truth! Absolutely share the Gospel! However in the middle of our efforts, as the text says, let’s remember to seek the unity in the Spirit. Let us intentionally make our faith a reality in the midst of what may look like overwhelmingly negative circumstances. Perfect love casts our fear.

We need to remember the three Hebrews facing the king and a fiery furnace when they said, “Our God is able to deliver us, but even if He does not ….” Well, obviously, in their case if God does not deliver them they die. If that is the worst that can happen we still win. They saw past the heat and flames.

Where is this kind of faith evident among Christians today? Why do we not see this today: a faith so strong we can deal with any circumstance while manifesting our faith and while also demonstrating the fruit of the Spirit?

I think to a large degree it is the lack of this kind of faith in today’s believers that has weakened our message. When Christ returns will he find faith on the earth?

If fear is what drives us we are far from the maturity Jesus desires in us.

Let our fears be reminders of our need to be trusting. “Shall not the God of all the earth do right?”

Your co-worker who needs more of this kind of faith at work in his life,

While on a sabbatical this summer it was a privilege to attend a seminar on church leadership in Minneapolis with aspects relating to multiple staff situations. Yes, I went with Jason Johnson … but that is a longer story. The course was taught by a former Alban Institute presenter. While I listened I was intrigued by one concept in particular: INPUTS vs OUTPUTS vs OUTCOMES.

All of us have lines of accountability. It could be to our spouse if we are married or an employer if we are working a typical job. Church ministry is significantly different. Lines can get messy because we are within the same family, so to speak. We become part of a covenant community, which is to be full of love and acceptance (hopefully), yet to pass down expectations and hold people accountable for responsibilities left unfulfilled are often difficult steps.

If we are ministers, we feel we are accountable to God. True enough, but within our Baptist structures every minister is to be accountable to others as well – to be specific that is usually a church board.

Now boards and churches often set forth vision statements and work toward goals. Too often those are considered relating to aspects of what a new ministry will cost and what will be the return in the near future. These are often short-sighted attempts to increase giving or attendance with hopes of more immediate results within the given year. There is nothing necessarily wrong with this work, in fact it is important, but an aspect is often missed.

INPUTS are what something costs, efforts that are put into a project, or the calculated time needed by volunteers or employees to get something off the ground. OUTPUTS are anything that can be counted after the ‘inputs’ are made. These results may mean more contributions financially, number of baptisms, greater attendance on Sundays or youth events, or an increased number of ministries being performed.

OUTCOMES are really what is beyond what can be counted but what is hoped for on a deeper level, in other words, ‘what is really important’. A deeper love for Jesus, a greater sense of family within the church as a whole, an unfulfilled hunger for God’s Word, commitment to living a crucified life – giving up everything to follow Jesus … these are the incalculable treasures we desire for our people and in our pastors.

Jesus would say, “Seek first the Kingdom of God and all these things will be added unto you.” We cannot place a numerical value on the depth of one’s soul in seeking God. We cannot easily determine the level to which someone practices denying themselves.

The better work of the church today is by those who first understand the desired ‘outcomes’ and then work backwards to determine the ‘inputs’ and desired ‘outputs’. To sit in a church business meeting and in the moment thinking of someone uninvolved and suggesting them to be up for an elected position is often done by thinking only of an ‘output’. It is getting someone on a list of candidates to filling a position, as if the goal was to complete the list rather than thinking of the big picture ‘outcome’.

I’ve just received the book The State of Pastors, 2017 by the Barna Group. It has been a serious study of pastors and has many statistics about changing dynamics for the church. A previous study was done in 1992 and some comparables are striking. The largest part of this sampling is, of course, from the USA.

One interesting stat is there are now more pastors over the age of 65 than under the age of 40. Another is that the average ministry tenure in 1992 was four years, but in 2017 is eleven years. Yet another stat is over half of existing pastors are over age 55.

For me in my role as coordinating pastoral settlement for the Canadian Baptists of Western Canada this data needs to be considered as we look at the future of the pastorate, of pastoral training programs, and of the nature of the church in a mere decade from now.

One interesting statement is made in the book (pg. 15), “… even faithful, kingdom-minded teens and young adults are increasingly attracted to vocations other than full-time church ministry, where their desire to make a difference can have a more entrepreneurial expression without the (real or perceived) institutional baggage of the church.”

I see keenly Christ-following young people in this generation, but the aging of today’s protestant church has taken root and has created a difficult dynamic that affects our future.

So let’s ponder these things and pray. But let us pray for a deep change that let’s us be Jesus’ instruments with capacity for this generation and the one to come.

Ministry leaders hear this: In North America and across the world today we continue to develop deep polarization along ideological lines. What is needed today is an extraordinary need to develop the skill of empathy. Empathy will help us communicate; without it we will continue to divide.

Sympathy can be pity with a bit of emotion thrown in (i.e.: “Sucks to be you”). Empathy is different. It is the ability to put oneself into another person’s shoes, figuratively speaking. A person who shows sympathy may also show some distance, keeping themselves from totally understanding another person. Empathy, on the other hand, should involve capturing the whole sense of the other person’s emotions, the reasoning behind their actions, appreciation for their personality and, on an internally intimate level, understand why the other is the person they are. At its best this skill is regarded as ‘accurate empathy’.

At the risk of being judgmental, there are many pastors who are weak in the skill of empathy. A colleague of mine even suggested that some even have pursued ministry because the Christian community has been too nice, too loving and too compassionate. Some pastors progressed through their schooling and even ministry situations out of a type of kindness that has not addressed critically their shortcoming of emotional and social intelligence. The demands of schooling and internships might have been met, but the ability of having the ability to connect with real people in real need can be lacking.

To have a learning opportunity in this area is likely right in front of us. It can be right there in the midst of a problem we are currently facing. It could be a board member, a congregant or a sibling where there is friction. David Swink in “Psychology Today” on March 7, 2013 stated, “Sometimes it may be necessary to act empathetically to achieve a desired outcome even when you feel antagonistic to a person. I have trained hostage negotiatorsfor many years. Hostage negotiators are trained to act empathetically toward the hostage taker in order to establish the rapport necessary to influence him to give up and not hurt anyone. In fact, the negotiator most likely despises a person that would hold a woman and baby as hostages. What is interesting is that after a couple of hours many negotiators actually start to feel some empathy toward the hostage taker as a result of ‘acting’ empathetic. Most of us will never find ourselves in that position, but you may need to fake empathy to influence someone to an important end. Hopefully, you won’t experience that frequently, because there is often a price to pay for being consistently inauthentic.”

Those with empathy skills can express feelings and connect on a feeling level. The ability to listening on an emotional heart level needs to have higher value in our search committees for ministry leaders. Those who can relate data, truth statements, and Biblical quotes without the ability to connect emotionally will have less impact on the world around them.

Yes there is risk in responding with empathy. It will take time, which is a very precious commodity, and there will be emotional cost. The stress and work is not to be negated, but with the ability to truly connect emotionally there can be joy, love, peace … shall I go on? The reward far outweighs the cost.

I may not be able to fix society, but here is some work I can do on myself. I am by no means an expert in this area. In my past I learned the skill to ‘grin and bear it’. I can protect myself. Distancing myself from anything that might be hurtful is my natural inclination. But I know Jesus knows me completely. He is empathetic. He is Emmanuel – “God With Us!”

Pastors encounter transition from a ministry location for many varied reasons. Those reasons might include retirement, another offer of employment or ministry, health problems, or a lack of ministry potential in their current setting. Here are some factors that the leading board and remaining staff need to consider:

A church family needs to go through a grieving and loss cycle. This is systemic, normal and healthy. Whether or not people would consider the former pastor as successful or loved, there will be those who are attached to the individual and need to go through this cycle. To move ahead before some have reached a measure of closure is more than unfortunate, it can be damaging to the next ministry or ongoing church health. Many times the board or staff have known a transition was in the works, but for some in the congregation it does not impact them until the public announcement that the pastor is moving on. The whole congregation includes those least informed, so take time for all to grieve and experience the loss. Successes will be remembered. Failures will be assessed. There is generally no need to respond to the accurate or inaccurate statements of blame and blessing that will be made during this time. Often there is an unrealistic and inflated views of both the accomplishments or the disappointments in the former pastor. The way forward means time needs to pass before a healthy decision can be made on how to proceed.

The “Type A’ personalities with CEO-type gifting will think of the pastoral role like an employment hire. Translation: “Just get on with the next stage and ‘fix’ the problem vacancy”. This corporate model is less than helpful in this instance. In truth the pastor has been seen more as a family member than as an employee by the congregation. The feeling with some will be more like a divorce has happened rather than an employment restructuring with new opportunities.

Have an interim or transitional pastor. In most cases I recommend slowing the pace with a six to twelve month interim or transitional pastor. That term should never be longer than eighteen months as the attachment to the interim becomes the same as with a permanent pastor. If, however, the church moves ahead too fast in hiring the next individual there is strong evidence that the next pastorate will be a short one. This interim period can be a good time to do some congregational assessment on church health. That information can be helpful to the next pastoral candidate. The transition time is often a time of church growth as people come out of the woodwork to fulfill roles and needs of the church in the absence of the former pastor. Ministries that are important will find new leaders and ministries that were marginal or less significant might fall to the wayside.

Wait to make significant decisions – at least for a few months into the interim period. Our Western culture does not generally possess the gift of patience. Waiting and postponing judgment until a more suitable time for key decision is generally wise in this situation. There will be pressures by some who will say, “What are we going to do?” This is an opportune time to draw people into prayer for the leading team. Having a plan is good, but definite decisions with long term effects are generally not helpful in the beginning stages of transition. If the plan is to set up a search committee who will work on a result in due time, that is fine. If the leading team is anxious, others will also be anxious. If the leading team is patient and confident God is in control, others will benefit from that attitude. This is a time to show faith and not fear. God has not left, nor will he neglect the needs of His Church.

I was mentally checking on a Bible verse when I came across this part of a phrase: “It is true that some preach Christ out of … rivalry ….” (Philippians 1:15). It struck me that I have heard messages like that and have at times preached in a similar manner. There were times preaching when I would have ‘a bee in my bonnet’ over some lesser doctrine, but I worked hard to make it sound very, very important. Silly me.

Paul goes on in the text and acts as though he does not care much about inaccuracies from the pulpit, even when twisted with wrongful intent. In context it seems as though from a distance some preachers were in competition with Paul and his message, but as long as preachers were preaching Christ Paul showed no great concern.

He does get riled up when it gets personal, as in 2 Corinthians, but he evidently knew those preachers, their intentions and their audience … people he loved dearly. He had the medium of making a written letter to appeal to discerning minds, so he used it to defend himself before those with whom he was in a meaningful relationship.

I’ve heard preachers preach against other preachers. I’ve heard sermons against other sermons. I’ve heard teaching against other teachings. Correcting an error is one thing, but it is another thing is if the intention is selfish, to put oneself in a better light than others who may in fact be faithful to God. We must not seek to have our influence be more important to us than the truth. I’ve seen people spouting what they say to be truth while evidencing little or no fruit of the Spirit in the process. We need to affirm the truth where we see it and in whomever we see it. Let’s be complementary when we can be. Let’s exemplify loving even our enemies. Let us pray for those who persecute us.